in reply to Re^6: Should I come back to Perl?
in thread Should I come back to Perl?

Short version: there was no Moose, no Moo, Catalyst was still new and relatively unknown, no PSGI, no Dancer, DBIx::Class was just forking from Class::DBI, no Mojolicious, the template space was completely stalled, the file handling space was old school File::Find, tools like Proc::Daemon were fairly sucky and unlikely to work on your platform (it’s an *excellent* tool today), CGI.pm had been the defacto standard for 15 years (counting cgi-lib). Circa that time, the core Perl team was in disarray and regular releases were a fantasy. Best practices was a fairly foreign cultural concept still—it’s often in stark contrast to TIMTOWTDI—and just gaining traction. There is hardly any generic code from 2005—not talking custom algorithms, one-offs, etc—that couldn’t be better written with the CPAN and generally accepted practices of today. Perl had one foot solidly in the grave around 2003. Soon thereafter it started to experience a renaissance that is still in progress.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Should I come back to Perl?
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 14, 2015 at 16:33 UTC

    Thank you! Informative summary.

    It had also occurred to me that there's metacpan now. And cpanm.

      Yes, yes, cpanm! And ack and improved prove and JS handling in UserAgents, and Path::Tiny and the Capture modules and other improved IPC modules and SQLite binary bundled with its DBD module and current Unicode, and, and, and. The landscape really is improved and the culture has aged well along with it.